Repo clean-up about semanticcompoundqueries

[kghbln]

I18n is cool!

[PeterTheOne]

About SCQCompoundQueryApi, see the discussion in https://github.com/wikimedia/mediawiki-extensions-SemanticCompoundQueries/pull/1.

[PeterTheOne]

I added some unit tests in #7.

[mwjames]

About SCQCompoundQueryApi, see the discussion in wikimedia/mediawiki-extensions-SemanticCompoundQueries#1.

I saw the discussion but that was before it was part of the https://github.com/SemanticMediaWiki repo so, for the given reason I'd like to see that reconsidered.

[PeterTheOne]

I'm open to changing the name to compoundask.

[JeroenDeDauw]

How about giving @PeterTheOne admin access to this repo? Ping @yaronkoren

Objectives

muh... while I appreciate the intent here, I really don't like that list. Code coverage is a bad goal. So is Scrutinizer. The cleanest non-trivial PHP codebase I know barely makes it over 9/10, with the points it loses all being things that are either false positives or not worth bothering about.

    Usable Software Design means to us that

        It is written for developers to read
        It is easy to find where to modify the code
        Any modification has a minimal ripple-effect
        It is easy AND fast to validate that we did the right thing
        We don’t have to do similar modifications in several places

Source http://mozaicworks.com/blog/smart-people-explore-usable-software-design/

[mwjames]

muh... while I appreciate the intent here, I really don't like that list. Code coverage is a bad goal. So is Scrutinizer.

I heard those arguments before and that applies to certain groups of projects but without any quantifiable objective, argumentation about "bad" or "good" is just an empty word phrase that cannot be compared to any yardstick. Instead of repeating something developers find inappropriate for their environment, I'd see a minimum of quantifiable standards (and the simplest without making things difficult for any anyone are numbers reported by Scrutinizer and Code coverage) be applied.

Whether those numbers can really reflect "good" from "bad", "trivial" from "non-trivial" isn't part of the issue nor of the overall objective to allow for some "semi maintenance standards".

I have cited [0, 1] in the past, and it is the responsibility of the developer to fill to void and not just hunt for a numbers. Those numbers can give some guidance for a project nothing more and nothing less.

[0] http://blog.ploeh.dk/2015/11/16/code-coverage-is-a-useless-target-measure/
[1] http://martinfowler.com/bliki/TestCoverage.html

[JeroenDeDauw]

Guidance can be very harmful if it is bad :)

[PeterTheOne]

What is still open here? Should we do the rename to compoundask?

[JeroenDeDauw]

I like compoundquery more. It's in line with the name of the extension.